Roy,
NB: THIS MAY SOUND LIKE A RANT BUT IT'S NOT, PLEASE FORGIVE ME IF I HAVE
SOUNDED OFFENSIVE. I DON'T INTEND TO.
I think the Linux community needs to decide what it wants to be, either be a
closed community of geeks that hate Microsoft or a providers of free OS that
is a viable alternative to Windows, e.t.c. that everybody can use.
For starters Linux is not for the poor. I am in Malawi, Africa where
internet penetration is very low. It's just recently that there has been
some sort of revolution in mobile internet. Most people that have internet
have dial up and internet charges are expensive.
People in my country would really like to use Linux but Linux is only most
good for those with broadband internet. The first thing that people want to
be able to do is listen to their mp3s and watch movies on their PC and if
you have installed a distro like Ubuntu on your machine that is next to
impossible for most people in my country.
The option of taking your PC to where there is broadband internet to install
the restricted codecs is in itself expensive. I also discovered that it is
almost impossible to install applications on Linux offline because of
dependencies.
Distros like Linux Mint do go some way in addressing such challenges. Do you
not want the masses to embrace Linux too (especially those in developing
countries) ? How do you suggest they do it?
Fred.
On Thu, Jul 8, 2010 at 12:05 AM, Roy <linuxcanuck@gmail.com> wrote:
> Mint users do not agree or even see any concern about licenses. They might
> as well not exist. I find that as disturbing as Mint's lack of position,
> BTW.
>
> I thought that Linux was more principled, but obviously I am wrong. I
> thought that Linux users cared more than they appear to, so am doubly
> wrong. Once we stood for something. Freedom is not the same as anarchy.
>
> Anyway, thanks for the thought, but this one is safely behind us ... for
> now. ;)
>
> Roy
>
>
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
No comments:
Post a Comment